Overexposure Artifacts

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by clayne, Jan 23, 2009.

  1. clayne

    clayne Member

    Messages:
    2,805
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Location:
    San Francisc
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    So I recently processed a roll of Neopan 1600@400. I additionally overexposed a ton of the frames due to user error (shutter speed just plain wrong). So as it was, some of the frames were probably taking +3 to +4 stops total (including the EI of 400) of overexposure. Now as expected, very flat images with little contrast and heavily burned highlights. That can be dealt with, but what I noticed is a strange broad edge blooming effect where on frames with more overexposure I simply had proportionally harder edge overexposure. On frames where I was closer to reality, it wasn't as bad. I can't tell if this is some agitation effect (I don't typically have issues there) and I surely don't remember opening the back, nor has the body (M4) had any issues with light leaks, etc. XTOL is fine, used it plenty of times before, and it's processed other rolls before and after without issue (although I typically do 1+1).

    Basically the only varying factor here is this specific roll - although I can say I don't often do XTOL 1+3, but chose to here to keep the dev times longer.

    Workflow:
    Leica M4 + Summicron-M 35mm f/2.0 IV,
    Fujifilm Neopan 1600@400
    Kodak XTOL 1+3
    11min@19C, 30s initial, 3 per 30s, 600ml tank, 500ml dev, single roll

    Since a picture speaks a thousand words, here is a blank frame from the same roll, two overexposed frames, and a sanely exposed frame:
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Herzeleid

    Herzeleid Member

    Messages:
    191
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Location:
    Ankara/Turke
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Did you do inversions or did you used the stick for agitation? They really look strange but if I had only seen the 3rd one I would say it is the agitation stick but the first one and the second, I don't know.

    If it was light leak the brightening should be more chaotic IMO why only on the edges. And the detail lost wouldn't be gradual, it would be like multiple exposure.

    Hope you find the problem.
     
  3. clayne

    clayne Member

    Messages:
    2,805
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Location:
    San Francisc
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    All agitation was with inversions.

    Yep, plus the end of the roll has no tell tale signs of an open back.
    About the only other variable is x-ray (as this film passed through multiple x-rays) but none of my other 1600-PR was affected, and in addition i'm heavily overexposing - a situation that shouldn't be in x-ray's favor.

    Only other factor I can think of is XTOL 1+3.
     
  4. glbeas

    glbeas Member

    Messages:
    3,307
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2002
    Location:
    Roswell, Ga.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    One possible thing, if you use an alkaline fix and open the tank too soon after pouring it in you will get fogging from residual developer activity as the alkali fix does not kill the developer. I found this out the usual way, DOH!
     
  5. Scruff McGruff

    Scruff McGruff Member

    Messages:
    56
    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I feel your pain! Like I said in response to you on my thread, try cleaning/re-mixing your equipment and chemistry. Also look for sources of light leaks not in the camera, like your changing bag and daylight tank (if you use these things).

    If you want to quickly eliminate the camera as the source of the problem, simply process a test strip of unexposed film (just pull out 6-7 inches after the leader on a new roll, snip, and repeat; that way you can use one roll to do five or six tests) and analyze it like you did with the blank frame you shot.

    I am certainly no expert, so YMMV. But, those images you posted do look pretty fogged throughout, so I would look for any unintended exposures to light or wonky chemistry.